The two thieves at Jesus’s crucifixion

  • Thread starter Thread starter eve.mich
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eve.mich

Guest
So I never knew this until a few days ago, but it turns out in the gospels when the two thieves were crucified with Jesus, they don’t all mention one of the thieves asking Jesus for forgiveness. Only Luke’s account (Chapter 23 Verse 42) has this event. On the other hand, Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32 say that both of them hurled insults at Jesus, while John’s gospel doesn’t mention them saying anything to Jesus, just that there was one on each side of Him (Chapter 19 Verse 18). I’m just curious as to why none of the gospels would be in agreement on this aspect of the crucifixion. Does anyone have their own insight to share?
 
it is in agreement, but in different stages. Imagine you take a photo of someone, they are doing one thing, then a second one later, they are doing a second thing. So the thief who is the good thief began by cursing and mocking Jesus with the other one, then repented. Luke records his repentance for his own theological purpose, whatever that is, Mark and Matthew record what he was doing before, for their own purpose.

a closer study would reveal this purpose, I am aware that all the Gospels have different themes, biases, and so on, for an example of this, read this: Luke’s Surprising and Oft-Ignored Views on Marriage and Resurrection | Is That in the Bible?

Luke for instance in favor of absolute chastity, etc. so you must investigate to see the themes of their Gospels and why they portray the events what they want. they are like artist, portraying the same event different for their own reason and emphasis, bringing out new aspects
 
That makes much more sense! Thank you for responding to my question.
 
krayzevuze said:
it is in agreement, but in different stages. Imagine you take a photo of someone, they are doing one thing, then a second one later, they are doing a second thing. So the thief who is the good thief began by cursing and mocking Jesus with the other one, then repented.
Click to expand...
That was Catholic teaching from early on.
Footnote on Matt. 27:44 in Haydock Bible: " St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Jerome, and Ven. Bede say, that at first both of the thieves blasphemed; but one of them seeing the wonderful things that happened, viz. that the sun was darkened, the rocks split asunder, &c. was terrified and converted, he believed in Jesus, and atoned for his former evil language, by praying to him as to his God."
I am aware that all the Gospels have different themes, biases, and so on, for an example of this, read this: Luke’s Surprising and Oft-Ignored Views on Marriage and Resurrection | Is That in the Bible?
Luke for instance in favor of absolute chastity,
Click to expand...
I realize that the link you gave is on a totally different topic, but that is the strangest interpretation of that Bible passage I’ve ever come across! Wouldn’t want anyone who reads it to think it had any validity. The context is whether the state of marriage (conjugal relationship between husband and wife) exists in heaven. Jesus in no way is saying celibacy is necessary for one to enter heaven.
 
Last edited:
eve.mich said:
I’m just curious as to why none of the gospels would be in agreement on this aspect of the crucifixion. Does anyone have their own insight to share?
Click to expand...
Apparently, in part to explain the differences in the written gospels, the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Paragraph 127, quoting the Second Vatican Council’s Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation (Dei Verbum), 19, says, in part:
The sacred authors, in writing the four Gospels, selected certain of the many elements which had been handed on, either orally or already in written form; others they synthesized or explained with an eye to the situation of the churches, the while sustaining the form of preaching, but always in such a fashion that they have told us the honest truth about Jesus.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This is only my personal opinion and thought but I’ve wondered if there were more than three being crucified that day. Jesus could have been in the centre of a group being crucified. Therefore, some on either side may have derided him but one also called on him for mercy.
 
"Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise” is one of the Seven Last Words spoken by Jesus on the Cross. Three of the seven, including this one, are in Luke only. In the English of the KJV,
  1. “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Luke only.
  2. “Woman, behold thy son! … Behold thy mother!” John only.
  3. “Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” Luke only.
  4. “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?” Matthew & Mark.
  5. “I thirst.” John only.
  6. “It is finished.” John only.
  7. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Luke only.
 
Last edited:
BartholomewB said:
"Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise” is one of the Seven Last Words spoken by Jesus on the Cross. Three of the seven, including this one, are in Luke only. In the English of the KJV,
  1. “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” Luke only.
  2. “Woman, behold thy son! … Behold thy mother!” John only.
  3. “Today shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” Luke only.
  4. “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani.” Matthew & Mark.
  5. “I thirst.” John only.
  6. “It is finished.” John only.
  7. “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” Luke only.
Click to expand...
It is almost as if the authors weren’t there at the scene.
 
Death by crucifixion takes a long time. That’s why the Romans chose crucifixion – it was an exceptionally cruel and painful form of the death penalty. Different eyewitnesses heard Jesus say different things at different moments.
 
Last edited:
Just a case of recording what was important to the respective Evangelists.

Remember, Luke received his information second-hand, where John (and possibly Matthew) was an eyewitness.

John also makes a point to say that Jesus carried the cross by himself, whereas the synoptic Evangelists all say that Simon of Cyrene helped him. They are not contradictory: Jesus carried the cross himself for part of the time (which John highlights), and Simon for part of the time, which the synoptic authors highlight.
In general Luke’s passion account is perhaps more touching, with the Mary-John intereaction and St. Dismas (the good thief), and the words “into your hands I commend my spirit,” which is used by the Church every night during Compline (Night Prayer).
Click to expand...
God bless you in this Bright Week,
Deacon Christopher
 
eve.mich said:
John’s gospel doesn’t mention them saying anything to Jesus, just that there was one on each side of Him
Click to expand...
To me, it makes sense because John, having already read Luke’s gospel, didn’t feel the need to repeat the dialogue. It is a feature of his gospel that he skims through some events while highlighting others.
 
Although each Gospel was inspired by the Holy Spirit, each Gospel was written by an individual man.

There isn’t disagreement, but only difference perspective, or a different snapshot in time being discussed.

Often, when several people witness an event and are asked to testify, the importance of every element of the event are different, but in the end the conclusion is the same.

Rejoice!
 
Consider the differences in the articles the day after the Super Bowl in the Kansas City Star and the San Francisco Chronicle.

Both are describing the exact same event, the facts of which are objective: Kansas City won the game 31-20.

But the Kansas City audience (and therefore, the article in its newspaper) will have a decidedly different feel, and will no doubt contain some different information, than the San Francisco audience will want to read. Both will give the final score of the game, but will also include far different persepctive.

Add in the fact that the Gospels were written many years and many miles apart, and vary from eyewitness account to second or third-hand accounts, it’s not surprising that they are not word-for-word identical.
 
eve.mich said:
Does anyone have their own insight to share?
Click to expand...
I suggest avoiding anything which seeks out an undotted “i” or uncrossed “t”.
for commonly they seek to present a conumdrum along with peddling of Doubt;
things which would only serve as a stumbling block for any who have no Faith…

Better to get to know Jesus: leaving potentially never-ending ventures by the wayside

_
 
EndTimes said:
for commonly they seek to present a conumdrum along with peddling of Doubt;
Click to expand...
I second that. ‘Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt, as I understand the subject; difficulty and doubt are incommensurate.’ - St John Henry Newman
 
Rather, the authors each had their perspective , their personality, their memories and their free will to decide what was important to write down and what was not. If all four Gospels were carbon copies, they would easily be dismissed. Indeed, each apostle wrote his Gospel message for a different purpose and to a different audience.

About 100 years ago when I investigated things, if stories matched exactly, someone (or all) was lying. clearly, they had “gotten their stories together” which is how all manner of conspiracies unravel. Read Daniel as to the two elders who accused Susanna of adultery. Their story was straight - except for one fact.

Each sees the same sequence of events, but first perceives it and later remembers it differently. To one apostle, a particular occurrence might be important, while another thinks not so much.

An excellent book for all who wonder about such things is Inside the Bible by Jesuit Fr. Kenneth Baker.

 
po18guy said:
Rather, the authors each had their perspective , their personality, their memories and their free will to decide what was important to write down and what was not. If all four Gospels were carbon copies, they would easily be dismissed. Indeed, each apostle wrote his Gospel message for a different purpose and to a different audience.

About 100 years ago when I investigated things, if stories matched exactly, someone (or all) was lying. clearly, they had “gotten their stories together” which is how all manner of conspiracies unravel. Read Daniel as to the two elders who accused Susanna of adultery. Their story was straight - except for one fact.

Each sees the same sequence of events, but first perceives it and later remembers it differently. To one apostle, a particular occurrence might be important, while another thinks not so much.

An excellent book for all who wonder about such things is Inside the Bible by Jesuit Fr. Kenneth Baker.
Inside the Bible: An Introduction to Each Book of the Bible by Kenneth A. Baker
Click to expand...
Who have said they had to be carbon copies of each other? I most certainly haven’t. But the contradicting parts are too contradicting in my opinion . If I was on jury duty I would not find them credible.
 
Since “faith” is an active decision to believe something based upon the data presented, I would argue that being on jury duty and religious belief is very similar.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top